Very good i liked it Aardvark

@Tessemi That's quite dry, care to emphasize or leave me hanging?

Okay thanks!@BandicootNewSnipes

No problem! @BandicootNewSnipes

@KerlonceauxIndustries @Dllama4 @ChiChiWerx Thanks a bunch!

@Shippy456 @TMach5 @CRJ900Pilot Thank you!

@RCalabraro @Jerba Wikipedia says it was an Interdictor and Tactical Attack Aircraft

@Jerba I always thought it was an interdictor

Nice job.

I love this craft, it’s one of my favorite bombers?(I have no idea what this is classified as.)

Excellent Work!

Cool@ChiChiWerx

@asteroidbook345 exactly...then end up with one of the best shipboard fighters of all time, plus an awesome movie! Could you imagine Mav in a ‘Vark?!?

@ChisP no

@asteroidbook345 even with those things, it would have been a failure as an air to air fighter. There was literally nothing which could have been done to adapt that jet to the mission the Navy needed it for.

Awesome! Great plane overall, and I love the simple cockpit as well

@asteroidbook345 actually, the 111’s gear, though it looks narrow, really isn’t. It’s an enormous jet, so it’s a lot wider than it looks. The 111’s problem with landing on the boat was the view out the front over the nose while on final (not good), the poor engine spool up time and poor acceleration if the pilot had to go around. Plus, the 111 has a wing loading of around 150 lbs/sq ft...there’s absolutely no way it it could turn well enough to fight a close in fight. But, why did they think it would make a good shipboard fighter? Because McNamara was an “out of the box” thinker and, apparently, a genius—he was called, literally, a “whiz kid”, and knew better than all the subject matter experts—pilots—who were telling him otherwise.

@asteroidbook345 i think the F-35 is an exception in that inter-service compatibility was part of the initial design considerations

@ChiChiWerx @asteroidbook345 @ChisP Part of the issue was that the Air Force had priority and the Navy had to make as few changes as possible, which is the completely wrong way to make an inter-service aircraft. Looking at other aircraft that have been used by both Air Forces and Navies, such as the F/A-18, F-4, A-4, E-2, A-3 (B-66 USAF), They all started as Naval aircraft, and were adopted by Air Forces. There are exceptions, such as the C-130, Hawk (T-45 USN), Sea Venom, Seafire, FJ, although these are within carrier parameters, by having short T/O distances or STOL capability (which the F-111 does not), and the general rule is for modern jet aircraft, for a successful inter-service aircraft, the Navy's requirements should precede the Air Force's.

Can you XLM mod it bigger?

@ChisP no, you’re thinking of the F-111B, which was the shipboard version of the F-111, it’s distinguishable in that it had a blunter nose. That airplane was developed at the insistence of Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara, who had run Ford Motor Company prior to his appointment as SecDef. McNamara insisted that the Department of Defense would save a lot of money if they used common airframes between the USAF and the Navy. As the AF was trying to field the 111 as it’s next interdictor bomber, McNamara insisted it be developed into the Navy’s F-4 replacement...for the role of fleet defense—essentially interception and air-to-air combat. The Aardvark is many things...but it’s not, and was never meant to be, a fighter...which the Navy discovered upon evaluation. I think 2 or 3 were built. When told that the 111 was thrust deficient as an air-to-air fighter, McNamara asked “well, how much more thrust does it need???” The Chief Of Naval Operations at the time replied, “There isn’t enough thrust in all Christendom to make a Navy fighter out of that airplane!” The B model was canceled shortly thereafter and the F-14 was developed as the Navy’s fleet defense fighter. The Air Force version, however, went on to fly a long and distinguished career, as an interdictor bomber, including in Vietnam and Gulf War I.

Cool.

Isn’t this the bomber base of the F-14

Nice, I like it.

@Mmdben lol